Você está na página 1de 2

Civil Procedure; Rules of Court; Pleadings

Eduardo D. Monsanto, et al. Vs. Leoncio Lim and Lorenzo De Guzman


G.R. No. 178911. September 17, 2014
DEL CASTILLO, J.

FACTS: In a letter dated February 18, 2004, Flordelis B. Menzon, Regional Director of the Home
Development Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG), requested the intervention of Executive Judge
Sinforiano A. Monsanto (Executive Judge Monsanto) of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Catbalogan, Samar on the alleged anomalous auction sale conducted by Sheriff IV Lorenzo De
Guzman (De Guzman). According to Pag-IBIG, De Guzman previously acceded to its request t
o move the date of the auction sale to January 20, 2004; however, to its surprise, the sale
proceeded as originally scheduled on January 15, 2004. Pag-IBIG also claimed that the winning
bid of Leoncio Lim (Leoncio) in the amount of P500,000.00 was grossly disadvantageous to the
government considering that the outstanding loan obligations of the mortgagor, Eduardo
Monsanto (Eduardo), was more than the bid amount.

Executive Judge Monsanto refrained from acting on the letter considering that Eduardo is his
relative; instead he re-assigned the same to Judge Sibanah E. Usman of Branch 28.

In an Order dated May 3, 2004 and captioned “In the Matter of the Extra-judicial Foreclosure of
Mortgage Filed by the Home Development Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG Fund),” Judge Usman declared
that on even date, RTC-Branch 28 conducted a hearing; that Atty. Cesar Lee argued on behalf of
Pag-IBIG; and that Pascual Monsanto (Pascual) appeared on behalf of Eduardo. However,
Judge Usman noted that no formal petition or complaint was actually filed which presents a
judicial issue; moreover, the acts complained of partake of administrative matter.
Consequently, Judge Usman referred the matter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)
for further action.

Subsequently, Pascual filed with the OCA, copy furnished the RTC-Catbalogan, Samar,
Branches 27 and 28, a Motion to Lift Writ of Execution and Notice to Vacate dated March 13, 2004.

Acting on the aforesaid Motion to Lift Writ of Execution and Notice to Vacate, the OCA, in a letter
dated May 9, 2005 directed Judge Usman to (1) conduct an investigation on the missing records
of ‘Home Development Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG) vs. Eduardo Monsanto’ and to report thereon
within THIRTY (30) days from notice; and (2) take action on (a) Items A and B of the ‘Motion to
Lift Writ of Execution and Notice to Vacate’ and (b) the letter of Home Development Mutual
Fund dated 18 February 2004, a copy of which is annexed to the ‘Motion to Lift Writ of
Execution and Notice to Vacate’, herewith attached.

Pursuant to the above directive, Judge Usman notified Pag-IBIG, Eduardo, and Leoncio of a
hearing scheduled on June 14, 2005. This time, the case was captioned as “Home Development
Mutual Fund (Pag-IBIG Fund), mortgagee, v. Eduardo Monsanto, mortgagor.”

In an Order dated July 1, 2005, the RTC-Branch 28, Catbalogan, Samar resolved two pending
motions, i.e., (1) the motion for issuance of writ of possession filed by Leoncio with Branch 27;
and (2) the motion to lift writ of execution and notice to vacate filed by Pascual with the OCA
but copy furnished the RTC Catbalogan, Samar, Branches 27 and 28.

Eduardo, Pascual, and Pag-IBIG filed motions for reconsideration; however, the same were
denied by the trial court in its August 30, 2005 Order.

On March 12, 2007, the CA issued the assailed Decision finding no grave abuse of discretion on
the part of the RTC and affirming its July 1, 2005 and August 30, 2005 Orders.

ISSUE: Whether or not the RTC has jurisdiction over the matter/case.

RULING: No, the RTC has no jurisdiction over the matter/case. “Filing the appropriate
initiatory pleading and the payment of the prescribed docket fees vest a trial court with
jurisdiction over the subject matter.” Section 5, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court specifically
provides that “[a] civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court.”
Moreover, “[e]very ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.”

In this case, records show that no formal complaint or petition was filed in court. The case was
supposedly “commenced” through a letter of Pag-IBIG asking the intervention of Executive
Judge Monsanto on the alleged anomalous foreclosure sale conducted by De Guzman.
However, said letter could not in any way be considered as a pleading. Section 1, Rule 6 of the
Rules of Court defines pleadings as “written statements of the respective claims and defenses of
the parties submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.” To stress, Pag-IBIG’s letter could
not be considered as a formal complaint or petition. First, the parties to the case were not
identified pursuant to Section 1, Rule 3 and Section 1, Rule 7. Second, the so-called claim or
cause of action was not properly mentioned or specified. Third, the letter miserably failed to
comply with the requirements of Rule 7, Rules of Court. The letter bore no caption; it was not
even assigned a docket number; the parties were not properly identified; the allegations were
not properly set forth; no particular relief is sought; in fact, only the intervention of Executive
Judge Monsanto is requested; it was not signed by a counsel; and most of all, there is no
verification or certification against forum-shopping.

We have also noted that no docket fees were paid before the trial court. Section 1, Rule 141 of
the Rules of Court mandates that “[u]pon the filing of the pleading or other application which
initiates an action or proceeding, the fees prescribed therefor shall be paid in full.” “It is
hornbook law that courts acquire jurisdiction over a case only upon payment of the prescribed
docket fee.”

In fine, since no docket or filing fees were paid, then the RTC Branch 28 did not acquire
jurisdiction over the matter/case. It therefore erred in taking cognizance of the same.
Consequently, all the proceedings undertaken by the trial court are null and void, and without
force and effect. In, particular, the July 1, 2005 and August 30, 2005 Orders of the RTC are null
and void.

Você também pode gostar